Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to observe what motion No. 666 says. Perhaps there is some misconception that it is an attempt to compel the Senate to take a particular view or to compel the government to take a particular action. I would like to note that this motion, No. 666, says that the Senate notes that the Senate notes that Australian citizen Julian Assange has been recognised as a journalist by others. It is a fairly simple and straightforward expression of facts that other institutions and entities around the world recognise this individual as a journalist.

I am not asking the Senate to acknowledge that he is a journalist; I am asking us to acknowledge that these entities consider him as such and, for some reason, the parties have been unable to agree to even that. He has been recognised by and received awards from the following entities: the Australian Walkley for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism 2011; the Queen’s Bench Division of the British High Court ruling of 2 November 2011; the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism 2011; the Italian International Piero Passetti Journalism Prize of the National Union of Italian Journalists 2011; the Spanish José Couso Press Freedom Award 2011; the Spanish Voice of the West Freedom of Expression Award 2011; and the Amnesty International UK Media Award 2009.

These institutions have recognised Mr Assange for what he is, a journalist, and Wikileaks for what it is, a publishing organisation. Therefore they are protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and perhaps then he will not be dropped into a hole at Guantanamo Bay or somewhere that we do not even know the name of. As for doing the job of a journalist, I will perhaps try again with a motion that is even weaker and see if senators could support that.